134. The representative of Chile said that as regards legal effects, the joint proposal would not only imply the obligation to consult the database, but would also create an important precedent which could then be an input for a decision by the IP offices, without resulting in an automatic protection. In other words, the fact that a term had been registered in the WTO database could have a certain effect.
135. He failed to understand why a system providing information would not help to facilitate the protection. He believed that it would help to facilitate the protection of GIs and he welcomed the EC's comment in the last meeting that acknowledged that "putting names in a database" would facilitate protection of GIs. The TN/C/W/52 proposal, which increased rights, would certainly facilitate protection for rights holders but it would also upset the balance of rights and obligations that was achieved within the TRIPS Agreement. Consequently, it would also upset the balance that should exist between right holders and consumers or users. He failed to see why the burden of proof should be reversed, as that would result in more value being given to the simple fact that a term had been put into a database than to the evidence given by an IP office, a court or a national using terms of foreign origin.
136. Chile, as a developing country, strongly believed in the use of GIs and itself had a large number of GIs. As his delegation had stated at earlier meetings, Chile used, promoted and generally protected GIs. Therefore, the Chilean's position should not be confused with the position of some Members who did not believe in GIs or simply wanted to eliminate them. While believing that GIs contained a development dimension, he said that there should not be an increase in the cost for authorities and users in Chile to the benefit of foreign right holders.
